THE LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE OPERATION OF DEPOSIT INSURANCE SCHEME IN NIGERIA

THE LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE OPERATION OF DEPOSIT INSURANCE SCHEME IN NIGERIA

ABSTRACT

Deposit Insurance System (DIS) has become a key component of most financial systems worldwide because of the important roles it plays in protecting depositors as well as contributing to financial system stability. Since its establishment by the Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC) Decree No. 22 of 1988, the NDIC, which is charged with deposit protection mandate has remained an active safety-net player in spite of many daunting challenges. The establishment of the corporation was bore out of necessity over two  decades ago when the Federal Government conceived the idea of the implementation of the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) in which the deregulation of the banking system would constitute an unholden central pillar. The NDIC has been faced with numerous challenges that have hampered the effective and efficient implementation of the Deposit Insurance Scheme (DIS) in Nigeria. Thus, this research work aims at examining these challenges and to proffer sound recommendations. Firstly, the corporation is faced today with the challenge of execution of court judgement against its assets for liability of banks in liquidation. This is because courts normally regard the NDIC as a successor- in-title of failed banks. Secondly, the amount fixed as maximum deposit claim under section 20(1) of the NDIC Act, 2010 to all the classes of depositors and regardless of the amount of deposit lost by a depositor in the event of failure of a deposit-taking financial institution is not reasonable. Thirdly, the penalty provided under section 45 of the NDIC Act, 2010 for non-compliance with its provisions and failure to secure the authenticity of any statement submitted pursuant to the provision of Act is less punitive. Consequently, it is hereby recommended that the NDIC Act, 2010 should further be amended to bar courts from executing judgement against the assets of the Corporation as a result of its statutory mandate as a liquidator of failed banks. Secondly, reimbursement of deposit lost by a depositor in the event of failure of an insured deposit-taking institution should be made full as this will encourage savings. Finally, the penalty provided under section 45 of the NDIC Act, 2010 should be increased by making it more punitive so as to encourage compliance. For the purpose of this research work, the doctrinal method of research will be adopted

Download Full Material-N5000

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE REGULATORY REGIMES OF THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY IN NIGERIA

 

ABSTRACT

This research work titled “critical analysis of the regulatory regimes of the petroleum industry in Nigeria” is centred on the legal and institutional frameworks of the regulatory regimes of the petroleum industry in Nigeria. The work attempted to trace the development, growth and evolution of the regulatory regimes in the petroleum industry pre and post oil discovery in Nigeria and in the same vein traced the evolution of regulatory institution in the petroleum industry. The work also examined the legal frameworks of the petroleum industry and also analysed the roles of regulatory institutions of the petroleum industry in Nigeria. Doctrinal research methodology was adopted throughout the research period. In conclusion, the work identified the following problems as factors affecting the regulatory regime in the industry; obsolete legal framework in the industry, inadequate penalties for defaulting companies operating in the industry, excess executive powers granted to the minister by the petroleum Act, fusion of corporate governance in the industry, conflict of oversight functions among the regulators and non-juristic personality of the DPR. At the end, we recommended that a speedy passage of the Petroleum Industry Bill is necessary if the obsolete nature of the existing petroleum laws must be addressed. Reduction of excesses administrative powers of the Minister of Petroleum should also be addressed by way of legislative amendment of the existing Acts, Decentralization of corporate governance in the industry should be a priority to our law makers, provision and enforcement of stiffer sanction regime should be enthroned in the industry, clear definition of functions and upgrading of DPR’s corporate personality should also be addressed by the relevant authority.

CHAPTER ONE

 

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

 

1.1       Background to the Study

 

The Petroleum Industry is currently the largest industry in Nigeria and the major generator of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the country which accounts for 80% contribution to the Nigerian economy. Nigeria‟s budget in a fiscal year is largely sourced from the Petroleum Industry.1

 

Oil was discovered in Nigeria in 1956 at Oloibiri2 after half a century of exploration. The discovery was made by Shell-BP, who was at that time the sole concessionaire of oil exploration licence in Nigeria. Upon the said discovery, Nigeria joined the ranks of oil producers in 1958 when its first oil field came on stream producing approximately 5,100 barrel per day (bpd)3. After 1960, exploration rights in onshore and offshore areas adjoining the Niger Delta were extended to other foreign companies. In 1965 the exploration field was discovered by Shell in shallow waters of Warri.4 In 1970, which saw the end of the civil war coincided with the rise in the world oil price, and Nigeria was able to reap instant riches from its oil production.

Consequent upon discovery of crude oil in Nigeria, and the increasing growth in the petroleum activities in the industry, there was the need by Federal Government to enthrone a legal and institutional framework by way of a regulatory regime that will regulate the petroleum industry. The effect of this led to the enactments regulatory laws in the industry5 and regulatory institutions respectively in order to ensure transparency, accountability and effective service delivery in the industry for the benefits of all Nigerians.

 

However, Nigeria operates a command and control regulatory framework in the petroleum industry6. This type of regulation was prevalent in the United States and Britain during the 1970s and 1980s7. Under this type of regulatory framework, regulators are deemed to be acting in the public interest. This work focuses on the extant public regulatory regime petroleum industry in Nigeria. Generally, factors, such as red-tape, over-regulation and regulatory capture, amongst others, are some reasons militating against a command and control regulatory regime8. This work will therefore attempt to

examine the state-oriented or public regulatory framework in petroleum industry in Nigeria, and the fundamental ills afflicting the industry.

Download Full Material-N5000

THE ROLE OF NIGERIAN COURTS AND TRIBUNALS IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

THE ROLE OF NIGERIAN COURTS AND TRIBUNAL ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

ABSTRACT

The judicial powers of the Federation and of States are vested in Courts established by section 6 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and other courts established for the Federation by an Act of the National Assembly or in case of States, Law made by the relevant State House of Assembly. The Judicial powers gradually, due to increase in litigations and criminal trials beyond the capacity of the regular courts, were no longer exclusive to the Courts but rather had to be shared with tribunals established for particular purposes. This development consequently brought about two parallel systems of adjudicating institutions operating side by side.

While some tribunals, like the investment and Securities Tribunal, have justified their establishment by dispensing Justice timeously and by experts in the particular field of the tribunal’s jurisdiction, others seem to have defeated the very essence of their establishment like Code of Conduct Tribunals. Tribunals like the Code of Conduct Tribunal apart from being redundant is seen as an agent of the Federal Government since it is absolutely controlled by the Code of Conduct Bureau, which is directly under the Presidency. This explains the redundant nature of the tribunal as it serves more or less as a stooge of the Presidency from where most of the culprits should have been arraigned.

 

The Laws establishing various tribunals have their inbuilt shortcomings that hinder the trial procedure or occasion unnecessary delays contrary to the very essence of establishing the tribunals.

The courts in Nigeria could be said to have contributed in some measure to the development of Law, particularly in the field of animal Law and Constitutional Law. However administration of Justice seems to suffer several challenges. Some of these challenges were attributed to factors associated with adversarial system, coupled with rancorous nature of proceedings and so on. Details of this has been vividly elucidated. The development in respect of funding of Courts has been pointed out.

CHAPTER ONE/ GENERAL INTRODUCTION

The court of law is an organ belonging to the judiciary department in the 3 arms of government in Nigeria. Public administration of justice is the primary function of the court. The courts are established with certain powers. The doctrine of separation of powers, places the three arms of government (Executive, Legislature and the Judiciary) on equal pedestals but with different areas of authority and responsibility. While the executive, implements laws enacted by the legislature in the course of governance, the courts interprets same for easy implementation. The courts, therefore, has long been an instrument of stabilization and a tool for administration of civil Justice.

Administration of justice is one of the vital functions of the courts. Generally, the word justice may mean reasonableness, fairness, equality of treatment e.t.c however, the courts have the most authoritative say in the determination and pronouncement of what justice is in every situation involving

 

claims and counter claims to legal rights and duties. Justice viewed in this context is an attempt to define the workings of the Nigerian courts in relation to how it determine and adjudicate matters brought before it. Relevant to this, is the concept of fair hearing, composition of the courts and the correctness of procedural rules. All these must be taken into account before the courts can perform its role and function Justiciably; hence section 36 of the 1999 constitution emphasizes on the right to fair hearing both in civil and criminal matters. This implies both substantive and procedural fairness taking into accounts jurisdiction and composition of courts.

The relevance of the courts has been emphasized by the jurists and writers to include as part of the functioning tools in governance. A court occupies a very unique position and performs near omnipotent functions, deriving from the role assigned to it in the constitution1. In Nigeria, the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN) provides that, “The judicial power of the federation shall be vested in the courts.”2 This power includes the power to adjudicate disputes between all persons, government and any person, interpretation of the law, determination of appropriateness of all actions, proceedings, citizens’ rights and obligations of government, agencies, corporate bodies or persons.3 The

 

functions of the courts therefore, include the promotion of justice, rule of law, stability, democracy, human rights and good governance and opportunity for sustainable progress, all of which form the bedrock of civil justice. In other words, the courts play a vital role in ensuring justice, by enabling a conducive atmosphere for

individuals and groups to appreciate their potentials and strive to contribute their quota in dispensation of justice. The court does not only guarantee humane and tolerable governance but also ensures stability in the political system4.

As highlighted above, the judicial powers of the Federation and of States are vested in courts established by section 6 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and other courts established for the Federation by an Act of the National Assembly or in case of states, law made by the relevant State House of Assembly. The judicial powers gradually, due to increase in litigations and criminal trials beyond the capacity of the regular courts,

 

were no longer exclusive to the courts but rather had to be shared with tribunals established particular purpose. This development consequently brought about two parallel systems of adjudicating institutions operating side by side.

While some tribunals, like the investment and Securities Tribunals, have justified their establishment by dispensing justice timeously and by experts in the particular filed of the tribunal’s jurisdiction, others seem to have defeated the very essence of their establishment like Special Military Tribunals, which hardly respect the fundamental right to fair hearing much less any other right. Tribunals like the Code of Conduct Tribunal apart from……………

 

Download Full Material-N5000

International Criminal Court and International Humanitarian Law in Africa

International Criminal Court and International Humanitarian Law in Africa

OVERVIEW

International humanitarian law is the law
dealing with armed conflict. It aims to limit
the adverse effect on both combatants and
civilians. Its provisions are primarily contained
in the 1949 Geneva Conventions and related
protocols. International criminal justice was
developed to ensure that those who violate
international humanitarian law are brought
to account. The Commonwealth is a strong
supporter of international humanitarian
law and international criminal justice. It
promotes the implementation of the Geneva
conventions and other international treaties
such as the Rome Statute which established
the International Criminal Court. Under the
principle of complementarity, the Rome
Statute gives primacy to national jurisdictions.
This means countries which have capacity
are able to investigate and prosecute crimes
under the Rome Statute.

Download Full Material-N5000